Armin Rigo wrote:
> Hi Ben!
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:33:50AM +0100, Ben.Young at risk.sungard.com wrote:
>>>Sounds like you are quite a long way towards your goal!
>>> That's great to impress the crowds indeed :-) But the so-called fast
> pystone is really not representant of anything at all;
Why so negative? This is a bit much of neglection.
I've been working with the two rpystone flavors for quite some
time, when the old genc code was active, and I have some
feeling about it. It feels very different, now.
Sure, it is true that there is no real measurement posible at the
moment. But in comparison with the former version, chings have
changed absolutely dramatically, IMHO:
On May 11th, I measured a speed gain of 11-12 on my windows machine
in "fast" mode. This is nothing, compared with the current
performance, which seems to be at least an order of magnitude
better.
Without hard facts, this at least tells us that we are generating
code that enables many optimizations which were not possible
at that time. And this is a very good result.
> it's also
> extremely machine-dependent, for unknown reasons. The other pystone for
> example gets a speed-up of anywhere between 13 and 40 on various
> hardware. Which means that there is still some work to be done...
If you meant "platform/compiler dependent", I agree.
The timings are not accurate because the code runs too fast.
If fast mode is enabled, it is quite likely that some compilers
optimize almost everything away.
I think dropping fastmode makes sense; it was only created to
see how far the old genc gets, without all the non-supported
data types.
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/